Sorry for the long radio silence on this; I had identified some issues with my prior report and wanted to rerun it with some fixes, and that analysis took rather longer than expected (mainly due to infrastructure slowness). Refreshed output for Ubuntu is here: https://people.canonical.com/~vorlon/armhf-time_t/ So comparing with Wookey's results, I see: Total -dev packages tested: 4603 Time_t changes ABI: 349 LFS changes ABI: 71 ABI unchanged: 2085 Compilation failed: 2098 So certainly this appears to be the same order of magnitude as Wookey's separate analysis. The other question is what impact this has on the archive as a whole, with triggering of rebuild transitions. Looking at the reverse-build-dependencies of those 349 packages gives: $ while read pkg; do grep-dctrl -n -sPackage -w -FBuild-Depends $pkg /var/lib/apt/lists/archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_lunar_*Sources ; done < abi-breaks | sort -u | wc -l 3626 $ NB this is a bit of an undercount as a result of packages that ship headers but aren't the thing being directly build-depended on. A more accurate count is probably to look at binary packages, from the same source as the -dev package, that the -dev package depends on and look at reverse-dependencies of those. But for a first pass, here's where we are. There are also roughly 2100 packages for which compilation failed. To know which packages actually have ABI changes and require transitions, we would need to work through this list and get the count down to 0. But as a first-order approximation, this looks doable to me as a transition we could manage. What do other folks think? Are you on board with proposing this to debian-devel? Anyone want to help add the necessary quirks to drive down the list of compilation failures? On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 03:00:41AM +0000, Wookey wrote: > On 2023-02-15 17:08 +0000, Wookey wrote: > > On 2023-02-04 21:42 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > Yes I think we should proceed with this analysis on debian to get a > > better handle on just how many libraries we are looking at. > > OK. We have over 10,000 *-dev package in debian so this took a while, > but I've now finished an initial pass. > The results are: > Total -dev packages: 10323 > Time_t changes ABI: 329 > LFS changes ABI: 58 0.6% > ABI unchanged: 1840 5.6% > Compilation failed: 1637 > No headers in pkg: 3852 > No library in pkg: 5086 > total analysed: 10249 > (note that the no-headers and no-libs categories are not exclusive > - the other classifications are) > > Not quite sure where we lost 74 packages down the back of the sofa but at 0.7% it's noise. > > So we have about 5000 packages which can basically be ignored for this purpose: > golang* (1943) > librust* (1955) - source-only, no dynamic linking, no .so's in any package > and libghc* (1065) - changes ABI at drop of hat (every new version) anyway. > > Of the remaining 5360, 5237 have .so files to check. Of those 329 > change ABI and another 58 are not built with LFS currently > so also change ABI due to that. That's 387 (7%). > > 34% are fine. And an annoyingly large 1637 (30%) did not build under > Abi-compliance-checker to determine one way or the other. Assuming 7% > of those are a problem that's another 114 packages. > > I've yet to determine how many of the 'no-libs/no-headers' packages > actually expose an ABI we need to worry about. There will be some > more, from stuff like boost and Qt. > > So the scale of the transition task in Debian is quite a lot bigger than in > Ubuntu: Probably 400-500 packages. > > I've linked my lists on the wiki page. > https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time > > I believe Steve L (who has done most of the heavy lifting on the > script) is running a check too and will have some results soon. > > Wookey > -- > Principal hats: Debian, Wookware, ARM > http://wookware.org/ -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature